Friday, February 09, 2007

An issue that is in the forefront of Ukrainian ultra-nationalist's political agenda. An issue that if left alone would resolve itself. There are far more important issues that confront Ukraine and linguistics is the least of them all.

Yes Ukrainian should be taught in Schools and no one objects to it being the official language, but does it need to be the only language that is used or allowed?

Victor Yuschenko, only this week, called upon the Government to impose the requirement that Cinemas in Ukrainian must be dubbed in Ukrainian.There is nothing worst then listening to a poor voice over dubbing of Ukrainian over a Russian speaking movie. In fact it is arguable that all voice over movies should be banned and replaced with subtitles if only for the viewers enjoyment. Freedom from bad quality voice overs.

Technology is such that consumers can be offered a choice of language. The market and consumers should be able to decide what movies and in what language they want to watch.

Government should not be regulating of interfering in the creative arts. Any decision related which languages is used should be that of the director/producer or distributor not the state. In a free society consumers should have the right to choose. The Government should encourage not dictate.

Language itself is a living entity. It changes over time with exposure to new culture, technology and common use.

English today is not the English that was first published in the King James version of the Bible or used by Shakespeare. Even in Ukraine there is a blend of Ukrainian/Russian that is commonly in use. The purest from of Ukrainian spoken today is in the Poltava Region. Lviv is a blend of Polish and Western Ukraine has a Hutzal/ Hungarian flavour. Modern day English words are also being adopted as technology and the English language begins to permeate through the country. History shows that the French, Swedish and Germans have all contributed their bit in the development of modern Ukrainian.

The former Austrian/Hungarian empire has a policy where each region could use their common local language and they did not try and impose a state language. That changed of course with the rule of the Czars and the former Soviet Union. Russian was imposed on the Ukraine, and we do not support that policy either. But the fact remains that there is a significant proportion of the Ukrainian in population that want to continue to speak their mother tongue, being Russian, and go about their day to day official business using a language that they understand. Many Ukrainian/Russian Speakers can of course understand Ukrainian but some can not. I can not understand Scottish at time if the accent is strong.

The sooner Ukraine can put this issue to rest, the sooner they adopt multiple languages (as exists in Ireland, Switzerland and Canada) the sooner Ukraine can begin to consider other issues more important, the sooner they can unite as one nation. Ukraine's greatest strength is its diversity and history of various cultures.Notes:

The state language of Ukraine is the Ukrainian language. (Editors note: It does not mention Sole Langauge as incorrectly referred to in the Kyiv Post article below)

The State ensures the comprehensive development and functioning of the Ukrainian language in all spheres of social life throughout the entire territory of Ukraine.

In Ukraine, the free development, use and protection of Russian, and other languages of national minorities of Ukraine, is guaranteed.

The State promotes the learning of languages of international communication.

The use of languages in Ukraine is guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine and is determined by law.

Article 11

The State promotes the consolidation and development of the Ukrainian nation, of its historical consciousness, traditions and culture, and also the development of the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of all indigenous peoples and national minorities of Ukraine.

Article 24

Citizens have equal constitutional rights and freedoms and are equal before the law.

There shall be no privileges or restrictions based on race, colour of skin, political, religious and other beliefs, sex, ethnic and social origin, property status, place of residence, linguistic or other characteristics.Article 92

The following are determined exclusively by the laws of Ukraine:..

4) the procedure for the use of languages;

Local court restores special status for Russian language in Ukrainian eastern city

KYIV (AP) - A local appeals court has restored a special status for the Russian language in an eastern city in Ukraine, officials said Wednesday.

The city council in Kharkiv voted in March to make Russian a regional language, allowing it to be used together with Ukrainian in state and public institutions as well as at universities and cultural institutions.

Local prosecutors filed a lawsuit against the decision and won the case in court. But the city council challenged the decision at the local appeals court.

The Constitution adopted by Ukraine following the 1991 Soviet collapse declared Ukrainian as the sole state language, but many Ukrainians, particularly in the east and on the southern Crimean Peninsula, consider Russian to be their native tongue.

Six regional governments and nine city councils in the east and south last year granted Russian special status – decisions that were heavily criticized by President Viktor Yushchenko.

The Party of the Regions, whose leader, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, enjoys strong support in the east and south, campaigned in elections last year on a promise to make Russian a second state language.

News in review

Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe (PACE) Explanatory Report calls on Ukraine to adopt a Full Parliamentary System in line with other European States

"It would be better for the country to switch to a full parliamentary system with proper checks and balances and guarantees of parliamentary opposition and competition."

Constitutional Court challenge

The authority of the President to dismiss Ukraine's parliament has been challenged in Ukraine's Constitutional Court amidst concern that the President's actions are unconstitutional in that he has exceeded his authority to dismiss Ukraine's parliament.

On April 19 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe passed a resolution in consideration of a report titled Functioning of democratic institutions in Ukraine. (Items 13 and 14) stated:

“ The Assembly deplores the fact that the judicial system of Ukraine has been systematically misused by other branches of power and that top officials do not execute the courts’ decisions, which is a sign of erosion of this crucial democratic institution. An independent and impartial judiciary is a precondition for the existence of a democratic society governed by the rule of law. Hence the urgent necessity to carry out comprehensive judicial reform, including through amendments to the constitution.

The Assembly reiterates that the authority of the sole body responsible for constitutional justice – the Constitutional Court of Ukraine – should be guaranteed and respected. Any form of pressure on the judges is intolerable and should be investigated and criminally prosecuted. On the other hand, it is regrettable that in the eight months of its new full composition, the Constitutional Court has failed to produce judgments, thus failing to fulfil its constitutional role and to contribute to resolving the crisis in its earlier stages, which undermines the credibility of the court.

There is an urgent need for all pending judgments, and in particular the judgment concerning the constitutionality of the Presidential Decree of 2 April 2007, to be delivered. If delivered, the latter should be accepted as binding by all sides.
”

The associated explanatory report under the sub-heading of Pressure on the courts expressed concern that "Several local courts have made decisions to suspend the Presidential Decree only to then withdraw them, allegedly under pressure from the presidential secretariat." (item 67)

In emphasis the report (item 68) stated

"This is a worrying tendency of legal nihilism that should not be tolerated. It is as clear as day that in a state governed by the rule of law judicial mistakes should be corrected through appeal procedures and not through threats or disciplinary sanctions ”

On April 30, on the eve of the Constitutional Court's ruling on the legality of the president's decree dismissing Ukraine's parliament, President Yushchenko, in defiance of the PACE resolution of April 19 intervened in the operation of Ukraine's Constitutional Court by summarily dismissing two Constitutional Court Judges, Syuzanna Stanik and Valeriy Pshenychnyy, for allegations of "oath treason." His move was later overturned by the Constitutional Court and the judges were returned by a temporary restraining order issued by the court.

Following the president's intervention the Constitutional Court still has not ruled on the question of legality of the president's actions.

Stepan Havrsh, the President's appointee to the Constitutional Court, in prejudgment of the courts decision and without authorization from the Court itself, commented in an interview published on July 24

“ I cannot imagine myself as the Constitutional Court in condition in which three political leaders signed a political/legal agreement on holding early elections, which also stipulates the constitutional basis for holding the elections... How the court can agree to consider such a petition under such conditions.”

Olexander Lavrynovych, Ukrainian Minister for Justice, in an interview published on Aug 3 is quoted as saying

“ According to the standards of the Constitution and the laws of Ukraine, these elections should have been recognized invalid already today. But we understand that we speak about the State and about what will happen further in this country. As we've understood, political agreements substitute for the law, ... The situation has been led to the limit, where there are no possibilities to follow all legal norms.